Archive for the ‘Pretty Lies’ Category

Sometimes the conspiracy theorists are right.

Mark Fuckersperg — the Facebook CEO who is so beta he cashed in his billions for a fat waifu — was caught on a hot mic promising Angela “Swarthenfreude” Merkel he would do what he could to censor comments on his one billion customer base social media platform that were critical of open borders and the waves of refugee migrants into Europe and America.

We all knew this about Fuckersperg, that he’s an anti-White, pro-mystery meat degenerate equalist leftoid, but now he has let the mask slip completely off.

On cue, amygdala-stunted shitlibs will intone, “Facebook is a private corporation, so it’s not a violation of the First Amendment if they censor unauthorized opinions! It’s well within their right, and if you don’t like it you can just log off.”

How bizarre to listen to nuanced shitlibs so vehemently endorse the letter of the law and the virtue of tolerating ideas that offend!

Yes, it’s true that Fuckersperg can’t be marched to the gallows for censoring speech on his idiotic attention whore enabling website. But what shitlibs who defend the sanitization of Realtalk never grasp is that censorship needn’t be a government-only campaign for millions of American citizens to have their voices effectively silenced. When nearly every major information medium is owned and operated by scorched-earth leftoids (and sniveling cuckservatives) harboring intense hatred for normal, core White Americans, then in practice their coordinated (organic or conspired) attacks on unauthorized speech amount to a society-wide censoring — a disenfranchisement, if you will — of those who don’t toe the Party Line.

Leftoid: “but but durrr you can’t yell fire in a theater, shitlord!”

And that’ll be the end of sensible human communication with the leftoid, and the beginning of slapping him aside with the back of your pimp hand.

Read Full Post »

A long time ago, the now-defunct Chateau Heartiste Twatter, censored on trumped-up charges by an obese bluehair, contained within its trove of 140 character bits of wisdom a prophecy, if you will, that the legal sanctification of gay marriage would inevitably and assuredly lead to the decriminalization and eventual social acceptance of a satanic host of other abnormal arrangements, including polygamy, polyamory, bestiality, cuckoldry fetishism, and… yes… pedophilia.

(Searching for this prophetic tweet is now impossible, so you’ll have to take my word for it.)

Twatter readers, red pillers all of them, nevertheless could not accept the CH prediction of the eventuality of pedophilia as necessarily consequent from the social and legal embrace of the gay marriage trojan condom. Those other CH predictions of glorious cultural progress – polygamy, polyamory, bestiality, cuckoldry fetishism – seemed so much more plausible to them than that there would ever be a time when the people would become so depraved that twisted rationalizations for pedophilia come as easy to them as rationalizations for gay marriage come to them today.


I’m a pedophile, but not a monster.

I’m attracted to children but unwilling to act on it. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?

Another CH prophecy heralding the dawn of Shitlibistan coming true right before your eyes. No need to wait for this one, either. The right side of history operates on a compressed time schedule.

You have to be made of stern stuff to broach the topic of pedophilia —

true pedophilia, not that phony “pedophilia” of which dumbfuck disingenuous, aging hag fat feminists accuse straight men for the sin of possessing a normal healthy male sexuality and being attracted to adolescent women with the full suite of secondary sexual characterisitcs

— without surrendering to an automatic, and psychologically healthy, reflux disgorging the nature of the topic from your thought channels. We’re not going to discuss the neurobiological possibility of pedophilia — a possibility which may exist but if so merely warrants that “sufferers” are absconded to the icy wastelands with extreme prejudice so their urges can never be made corporeal — but instead prefer to focus on the leftoid reaction to the neurobiological possibility of pedophilia, which creates a powerful cognitive dissonance because the vile nature of pedophiles rubs against the two predominant moral senses of liberals: fairness and harm avoidance.

What is the sensitive, tolerant, open-minded, GoodWhite liberal to do? If pedophiles “can’t help it” — just like gays can’t help it — then is it not imperative that “society” (aka the CisWhite Privilege Zone) accept them for who they are, be more fair toward them, and reduce any discriminatory and exclusionary harm against them? But children can’t consent, right? Oh dear oh my this is a pickle, frets the shitlib. But if this is the pedophile’s nature and he is proud of who he is (just like fatties and trannies are rightly proud of who they are), asks the feminist, shouldn’t he have the right to be free of the patriarchy’s judgment?

The fretting is on full display in that Salon article’s comment section, where you can practically see the smoke coming out of all those liberals’ ears as one moral abstraction exercise after another fries their androgyne circuits, and their rationalization hamsters spin themselves into an oblivion of scattered tufts of fur.

What you are witnessing is the first tentative equalist leftoid incursion on the final Western cultural taboo. Most shitlibs aren’t quite ready to “go there” yet, but their pained and labyrinthine babble betrays a weakness within them to abandon this distinctly conservative moral objection against any form of pedophilia acceptance. Leftoids know, even if they won’t admit it now while the taboo is still powerful, that absent no-nonsense authority figures to stop them from indulging their worst instincts they will eventually find their way to pedophilia nonjudgmentalism.

The problem now for leftoids becomes, “Well, if we draw a judgmental line in the sand at pedophlia, that will open the discourse to drawing judgmental lines in the sand for a lot of other misfit paraphilias that we have championed for the past sixty or more years. Do we dare provide support for this last taboo and risk the edifice of our entire lost world crashing down upon us?”

And there we discover the leftoid’s underbelly: her nonjudgmentalism. What a caustic, deranged, demonic philosophy is nonjudgmentalism, that one day soon it will be put to the project of normalizing the vilest freaks in the human panoply. It is already underway: faggotry, obesity, ugliness, stupidity, sluttery, single mommery… even antipathy to racial self-preservation!… are being normalized from the center outward by the nonjudgmentalism anti-matter philosophy that motivates equalist leftoids.

Leftoids are toddlers in lumpy adult bodies. They throw tantrums over the stupidest shit, and if you cave to their demands just to make the noise stop they learn that throwing tantrums is a profitable way to get what they want. Like toddlers, leftoids need to be sternly admonished, and sometimes SPAKNED, into submission. Truth is, most leftoids have a secret inner submissive begging for a strong patriarchy to set strict boundaries on their behavior.

“I’m a pedophile, please hear my story.”

Brace yourselves, because the blowback to our emerging Weimerica is shaping up to be violently spectacular.


Speaking of gaypedofaces, this is totally unsurprising: The cucks at National Review have more sympathy and understanding for avowed pedophiles than they do for “white nationalists” and “nativists”.


Commenter GW reminds leftoids of the consequences of their chosen morality,

If a child can “choose” their gender, they can “consent” to sexual relations with an adult.

These kinds of obvious contradictions in leftoid thought should keep them twisted into pretzels trying to defend themselves, but unfortunately the leftoids’ authorized opposition is controlled and cucked and castrated, and so they will never be called out in the way they should. Except at this humble outpost, Chateau Heartiste. Where the calling out of leftoids is accompanied by a shiv sharp enough to vivisect their polluted ids.

Read Full Post »

For new readers: “poz” is shorthand for the propagation of culture degeneracy, filth, freakishness, and antipathy toward normal, psychologically healthy humans. The epithet is retrofitted from its original use in the gayfag “bug chaser” sewer, where poz is a term of endearment for HIV positive gay men.

The poz is everywhere in America, but just how deep does it go? We turn our attention to the top five films hailed as “masterpieces” at this year’s Toronto International Film Festival. Synopses of each movie follow.

The Danish Girl – Set in the 1920s, a M2F tranny freak lops off his penis to become a woman. His wife supports him and takes photos of him in erotic poses.

About Ray – Three generations of single moms, bitchy lesbians, and proud sluts create a huge cunty hug box to help guide a F2M tranny freak teen girl through her testosterone therapy and tit chopping surgery.

Freeheld – Brave lesbian cop, compassionate gay rights activist, homophobic county officials, transformations, and payment transfers.

Truth – Historical revisionism recasting Dan Rather as noble truth-teller instead of as the lying, pathologically partisan shitlib in self-denial that he is and always will be.

Spotlight – Hagiography of Boston Globe shitlib journos who reported on child abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. Not mentioned: over-representation of homosexual deviance in the ranks of the priesthood, Bryan Singer’s Hollywood boylove pool parties.

To answer this post title’s question: The poz goes very, very deep. If your girlfriend asks you to accompany her to one of these fruity, implicitly (and sometimes blatantly) anti-straight white man flics, tell her no way. If she insists, tell her you think less of her for wanting to indulge this garbage.

Read Full Post »

The latest liberal screech-out is high dudgeon over some prankster teenage muslim mud in Texas who brought a “””clock””” to school as a science project that looked suspiciously like a suitcase bomb, and his teacher justifiably freaked out and called the cops.

Status whoring badwhite-hating disingenuous shitsack liberals, of course, are springboarding off the incident to claim, for the umpteenth time, that racist White America keeps the mudman down, neglecting to mention while in thrall to their righteous indignation that White kids have been tossed out of school and hauled before court for, to wit, bringing in a pop tart bitten into the shape of a handgun.

America, fuck yeah!

Anyhow, as details have leaked past the Hivemind information bottleneck, it’s become apparent to anyone who isn’t a robotic, race creationsist leftoid that the kid was doing the bidding of his white-hating black muslim family. The “clock” was deliberately mocked-up to resemble a suitcase bomb and frighten White authorities, who would react in the appropriate way (and according to Texas law which explicitly forbids bringing objects to school that look like jihadi weapons of area-wide destruction).

The oh-so-innocent Ahmed’s darling parents are lined up behind him in faux outrage, delivering speeches to the media that sound like they were scripted by a team of Alinskyte shock-troop Eskimos.

An emailer adds to the evidence that this bomb/clock story is a giant middle mudfinger in the face of White America,

RE: Ahmed’s completely innocent homemade clock.

When I first heard about Ahmed, the kid who made the news for his “bomb” clock project, I took his side. I played with discrete electronics as a kid. I built breadboards, I soldered, and I experimented with early robotics… In this STEM obsessed educational system, why couldn’t the school officials quickly dismiss this scare as a science project? Why did this make the news? I just didn’t get it… and then I saw a picture of the clock.

From CNN: “A teenager with dreams of becoming an engineer, he wanted to show his teacher the digital clock he’d made from a pencil case.”

Anyone with an understanding of electronics will immediately see this “homemade clock” is not the tinkering of a child or teen. It was never Ahmed’s idea to begin with. This isn’t some innocent science project. The picture of the clock exposes the lie. Ahmed did not lovingly patch together IC chips and resistors, as the media would like you to believe. What you see is the guts from a manufactured digital clock, right down to the 9 volt memory backup, and the prefab button board. Absolutely nothing was made. It’s the equivalent of taking the plastic surround off of your TV and claiming you “made” a TV.

Look at the case itself. CNN calls it a “pencil case.” Please. The whole package is vaguely sinister, and it’s intentional. Notice the nondescript packet of unidentified white powder. See that nice dent in the side? I wonder if you could stash plastic explosives behind that huge LED. Why is the lining so bumpy? Look at the shoddy taping and the twisted wire used to close the case. It’s almost as if someone designed this clock to look like a questionable object.

Again, from CNN: “”I built a clock to impress my teacher but when I showed it to her, she thought it was a threat to her,” Ahmed told reporters Wednesday.” It was really sad that she took the wrong impression of it.””

Ahmed, you didn’t build a clock. You’re a pawn to your Dad’s political and social agenda. This is all a creation of your father. I’m sure he involved you in the process, and made you feel as though you were truly making something, but you didn’t. It’s a clock without its case. Everything in the “pencil case” was made in a factory. See, a legitimate electronics project full of diodes and resistors looks innocent. It usually runs off of a battery, not an exposed AC to DC transformer… speaking of science projects, Ahmed, why again did you bring this to class? Was it part of an assignment? Oh, you just wanted to impress your teacher with a clock you rearranged inside a small briefcase? Hmm…

From dallasnews.com: ““He fixed my phone, my car, my computer,” Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed said. “He is a very smart, brilliant kid.”

If he were so smart, he’d know the difference between creating a circuit and stripping the guts from a manufactured clock. His dad helped him “make” this, and dad helped to make this “project” look as questionable as possible, within the realm of plausible deniability.

The dad is a politician.  He made this happen. Whatever agenda he’s advancing, it just further demonizes western society, and reminds us all to be guilty for how racist we all are. Maybe that’s the agenda.

It’s propaganda.

Yes, and these anti-White ingrates wouldn’t get nearly so much mileage out of their schtick if they weren’t enabled by a ready and willing army of millions of fanatical white leftoids (and their eskimo paymasters) to see how much they can freely shit in the faces of normal White Americans.

Perchance to say, wake up white man. It’s getting ugly out there.

Yet more proof of the CH ur-maxim:


Strip away the particulars of these increasingly unhinged and ludicrous attacks against BadWhite America, and we are left with two insistent questions:

Why are all these ingrate nonWhites even in America in the first place?


Why do White Leftoids have so much power?

Someone’s gotta ask the first principle questions; it may as well be CH.

Read Full Post »

This hamsterbation on Jizzebel is a couple years old now but it may have broken an all-time record for number of CH readers who forwarded it requesting a satisfying takedown. All you have to do is read the title to know you are about to enter… The Hamster Zone. (At this point you visualize a hamster wheel spinning through outer space.)

What kind of guy does a girl who looks like Lena Dunham ‘deserve’?

What kind of apex predator can turn down sinking his teeth into that juicy bait?

The “””article””” is about that insipid show Girls (has it fallen off the air yet?) and specifically about the episode when lumpy moocow Lena Dunham’s character gets into a relationship with an older, handsome doctor.

Yeah, try to contain your credulity.

Apparently, feminists are offended (what else is new?) that some viewers have expressed the doubleplusungood opinion that Dump-ham didn’t deserve the blind good doctor.

As Will Munny said to Little Bill before shooting him dead: “Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.”

No woman, or man, “deserves” a certain class of lover. Anyone who says that (and it’s mostly women who say stuff like this) is intoning a palliative for her bruised ego. Everyone has a value on the sexual market, and if you want better choices of partners you have to work to make yourself more valuable.

asdf comments:

The key takeaway from this Girls episode is no matter how much of a loser a woman is she can sleep with top quality men simply by lowering the price enough.

Not really. Girls is unrealistic. A fantasy itch for Lena. IRL, a 4 like Dunham doesn’t get sex from handsome doctors, let alone commitment. There is this meme floating around the omegasphere that all kinds of ugly and fat and old and thunderously-thighed women can get sex from alpha males at the drop of a hat, but that is a fevered concoction badly extrapolating from a loose interpretation of the functioning of the dating market. Men, especially White men, and particularly popular White men, do discriminate when choosing which women they will bang, and their discrimination will become more intense, violating all sorts of EEOC laws, when considering a woman as a long-term girlfriend or wife prospect.

Lena Dunham is repulsive to most men with options, and she will be passed over by those men for sex with prettier women, even if it means the men pay a higher price in energy and time devoted to the pursuit of prettier girls. The only way the Lenas of the world can compete with better women is by slashing their prices so low that they are practically giving away their LSMV pussies. And a bargain bin price drop is no guarantee of sex for the bottom 10-20% of women who are so gross to look at that most of them won’t get any man’s attention, let alone an alpha male’s, with their legs wide open and a neon red vacancy sign pointing at their crotches.

This is a sexual market reality that trips up a lot of bitter men who have a weird need to imagine women have it incredibly easy and men must do all the lovelorn suffering. The dregs of womanhood will suffer incel spells, and longer insol spells, although the frequency of dry spells and the duration of each dry spell will be generally less frequent and shorter for women than they will be for men of equal low mate value.

Another sex-based distinction is that women will better tolerate periods of sexlessness than will men, while men will better tolerate periods of lovelessness than will women (as long as the lovelessness is substituted with casual sex).

Now this is not to say that women, ON AVERAGE, don’t have an easier time than do men getting sex when they need it. While both men and women are discriminating in their mate and marital choices, women can afford to be more discriminating pre-sex, because the average woman’s sex is worth more than the average man’s sex. But that’s where a lot of men and women have their perspectives skewed — a man’s worth to women is not his sex so much as it is his *commitment* and *survival utility*. The woman who can extract commitment from an alpha male is a winner. The woman who can only get pumped and dumped by desperate goons is a loser. And she knows it.

So, no, the Lean Dunhams of the world are not getting banged out by high status docs, and they certainly aren’t getting proposals from them. Instead, the Lena Dunhams are dumpster diving with dirty, socially maladroit, dull, whiny milquetoasts.

And deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.

Read Full Post »

There is a relatively new class of troll who bears a striking resemblance to the well-known “concern troll”, but who is in some respects far more insidious in his methodology and ability to derail comment threads on blogs devoted to the teachings of the charisma arts. I call this new breed the “game contradictions troll”.

A classic example of the game contradictions troll is this comment by “The Shrike” (who may not necessarily be an insincere troll, but whose complaint nonetheless serves as an ideal representative of the sort of comment a game contradictions troll would leave).

A lot of sound advice in this post. It looks like the author is slowly shifting away from the unabashed, detached Lothario pose to a more conservative outlook on life. Conservative values are not my own, but it seems that this is a more consistent approach when it comes to the opinions often professed by the author and most of the commenters here. A recurrent theme is the impending collapse of the Western civilization, largely caused by female hypergamy. The majority seems to abhor the fact modern women ride the proverbial “cock-carousel”, seemingly forgetting that no amount of game would be effective against uptight prudes who only ever do it after marriage, and only to procreate.

Game contradictions trolls thrive on a studied ignorance or disavowal of the true fact of life that there are different standards for the sexes, and that these standards are not set by men, but by nature, and men merely conform to these sexual market standards and rationalize their fairness (or unfairness) when it suits them, (we are not a rational species, we are a rationalizing species).

No one on this board has claimed that female hypergamy is the prime cause of Western decline. Female hypergamy is one of those differing sexual market standards that apply to women and not to men, and that can’t be wished away. The assertion often made at CH is that female hypergamy is a real phenomenon, and it is best to accept the reality of it and MAKE IT WORK FOR YOU rather than shake your fist ineffectually at it in hopes women magically cure themselves of their evolved desire to mate with, and extract the commitment of, the highest status men that their looks can realistically afford.

Riding the cock carousel is NOT necessarily a manifestation of female hypergamy. The cock carousel is the consequence of socially atomized anonymous urban environments coupled with contraceptives and economic self-sufficiency providing cover and incentive for women to indulge the part of their sexuality that yearns for dominant, charming, jerkboy cads who are hard to pin down into committed relationships. This is not female hypergamy fulfilled, but female hypergamy THWARTED, as it is the Darwinian directive of every woman to land the most desirable alpha man and to KEEP HIM AROUND.

There is an interesting clash of contradicting attitudes here. Not arguments between different posters, but internally inconsistent opinions voiced by the same people. Game is still a hallowed topic, not to be touched with a mortal hand, but it runs counter to the otherwise conservative leanings of the commenters. A stable family-unit, also much cherished around here, is mutually exclusive to widespread promiscuity exemplified by men who “game” women, and women who are willing to play along.

Another category error made often and reliably by trolls and anti-game haters. “Game” is not synonymous with promiscuity, although game certainly aids the pursuit of promiscuity if that is what is desired. A man could just as easily use game — aka learned charisma — to meet, seduce, date, and when the time is right, marry the most beautiful oneitis he has ever laid eyes on. I wouldn’t recommend it, but there you go.

Ultimately, there is a choice to be made if a man is to be congruent at the most basic level. Either champion a virtuous society where loyalty matters a lot, and people pair up with the intention of forming serious relationships. Or support the cad lifestyle where jumping from one woman to the next without any consideration is the norm.

Men have a longer SMV window than women and bear a smaller cost for each act of copulation than do women, which means in practice each man can, and should, get some romantic experience under his belt (heh) and then marry, if he wishes to marry, a younger woman. The fact of biologically grounded sex differences which aren’t going anywhere means that cadding about is always going to be less psychologically, reproductively and emotionally expensive for men than slutting around will be for women.

If it’s the latter, then it’s difficult to blame women for trying to do the same.

First, most women aren’t interested in doing the same, despite transparently try-hard protestations to the contrary by fat, bitter feminists. Second, it’s not difficult to blame the women trying to emulate the lifestyle of the alpha male cad for their short-sightedness. Different sex-based standards in the sexual market, and different sex-based psychosexual temperaments, are an emergent fact of life, not a directive handed down by the invisible pimp hand of the patriarchy.

If it’s the former, then much of the game concept goes out the window, though some aspects of getting a chosen female interested presumably are still useful.

How about, “game gives men the tools to successfully attract and keep women in sexual and emotional relationships.” There. That’s not so hard now, is it?

Read Full Post »

You’re going to hear a lot of mewling by cuckservatives this election cycle — as you have heard from them for the last, oh, eight election cycles — about the GOP needing to be more “optimistic”, because “Americans want to hear a message of hope, (not nasty dispiriting truths).”

Ignore it. Do you know what an optimist buried to his neck in a rising tide of shit is called? A fool.

“Optimism” is cuck-code for “sweeping reality under the rug and continuing the sell-out of white Americans”.

PS Here are some ❤️heart-warming photos❤️ of international border walls from around the world.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,351 other followers

%d bloggers like this: